Yeah, that could be one of the most ridiculous, biased, irrelevant studies in the history of the world...

http://www.msnbc.com/news/907199.asp?0si=

Somebody please explain to me how acid injected into a fish's lips is equivalent to a barbless salmon egg hook. They used trout in this experiment by the way, which as we know are not the hardiest fish to begin with. The fact that the trout were even able to survive after that ordeal is a testament in itself. Might've been a better idea to test a FISH HOOK in the fish's mouth to see how they react. Hmmm, could I be the only one to think of this??? Dollars to donuts they tried it and didn't get the desired results.

I bet I could even explain why, off the top of my head. The tested fish have a frickin thing lodged in their lip! Of course they're gonna get pissed off until it's out of their face. Hardly comparable to a 30 second piercing.

The whole argument is not even worth arguing in the first place it's so stupid and extreme. I just get pissed off that the media and public give it the credibility that they do. Fish are designed for eating gnarly things. Using bass as an example, they can and do eat crawdads, spiny bluegill, snakes, lizards, etc etc etc. The only difference between chomping a bluegill or crawdad and a 3/0 gammie is the stress involved in the fight, not the pain. Stupid stupid stupid. This kind of stuff makes me want to strangle somebody at msnbc for even taking it seriously. Gawd, once you see PETA's name in anything you can read between the lines.....


Sorry to take away from the original topic, my only concern with barbless hooks in the surf would be losing fish in the waves and stuff. You generally have to keep constant pressure with a barbless hook and that might be tough in the surging waves and what not. I think if you just go with a light wire hook you'll be fine. The fish are gonna be fine and dandy 95% of the time anyway.
-Brian